Ok, So I would like to review "Is genesis History?" I just got home. I am shooting from the hip I did not take notes.
Production
The biggest performer in this production was the scenery. They were all over the world in incredible locations with awesome angles. The video production crew was a world class quality.
There is a long series of interviews with about half a dozen scientists. most of which are associated with major creation science ministries.They divide the topics up into geology, Bible history, paleontology, biology, astronomy, archaeology and the big picture in the garden.
After the movie it actually extended in a post movie roundtable discussion.
positives
The movie is very efficiently produced. being on locations has a hi impact. Showing the Mt. St. Helen's sites really demonstrates the flaws of uniformitarian ism. The visuals of the canyons revealing color differences in the rock layers and realizing that these layers are connecting thousands of miles of rocklayers stack so intricately requires a global amount of water to move it.
The distance of certain (scratching lines? i forgot what they called it) across the mountains showing short measurements between each other indicating faster movements and a catastrophe.
demonstrations of the stretchy dinosaur soft tissue.
The Hebrew scholar noting the nature of the text as a narrative and not poetic literature according to the Hebrew context.
Robert Carter a marine biologist stole the show in terms of personality (Idk if it is the same guy Teno
:p )
The discussion at the end of the program was really helpful talking about issues in creation science and how research is growing and the challenges regarding how much material to present and how technical to make it.
btw, the theater was almost sold out! another theater in the city was sold out.
criticism)
It is really hard to say if this was for unbelievers or believers. we have to assume it was for believers.
packing all the issues of creation science in two hours is a daunting task I explained my cosmology in 13 hrs on youtube. but two hrs is a lot of time to demand of someone. Even church kids are not necessarily science kids and we live in an ADD generation. but there was a nerdy boy at the ticket counter who was excited to go!
The format was ultimately an interview lecture. large large gaps of time with monologing answers. Very little music, no jokes, only one style of illustrating with a magic pencil upon a brown paper bag back drop. As obsessed with creation science as I am there were still extra long winks! Geology is a boring topic it should probably have been discussed later.
There is too much in house academia. Yes they typically more sophisticated, popular and have access to the best equipment, But they are often ignorant of the history of creation science and instead trained with som many naturalistic pressupositions that they accidently import unbiblical assumptions and ideas which are more in accord with evolution.
The technical language is not helpful. Nobody is being graded as to how much info they retain so if you loose the audience with technical phrases you loose your influence.
Creationist are correct in place history over science. But sometimes they do not carry this fact to it;s logical conclusion.
History is our evidential starting point! Science must submit to it and not the other way around. evidentialism does not work unless it is based in scripture. There will never be evidence that debunks scripture!
I believe the interviewer was part of the truth project under "focus on the family. He was an ID guy if I recall. Of course he may have switched to YEC , which is cool!
The guy presenting mark Armitage's research if I recall had controversy with him. I saw a youtube video wereI think Mark accused him of taking crfedit for his research. But I could have the wrong guy or they may have reconciled.
It was admitted in the post discussion that there are so many theories and they just change according to the ideas they "like more". it is annoying how a lot of good ideas have been ignored.
For instance the g;obal hurricane idea from CPT catastrophic olate tectonics where the storm makes the ice age just never made sense to me. the ice canopy theory is by far a superior explanation.
concept
Just what was the purpose of this event. I felt pretty rushed to find the time for this specific day. evangelism? Fund raising? education?
All of which have flaws. but perhaps this will prove succesful only time will tell.
feelings
all in all it is good to get the public informed about creation science.
But I do feel that as the creation science movement is growing I think the leadership is losing a lot of what has been great about the movement.
There is less scientific free thinking, more compromises with heresy, There is a concentrated effort to "tame" creation science advocates within the camp.
As the rappers say "mo' money mo' problems!"
As I exited I saw a pack of college age kids. four kids looking "churched" a shy girl with skepticisms. she was asking questions about languages and youths didn't have an answer. I really wanted to but in, but I was a stranger and then as I was about to step in any my wife came out of the bathroom and it was time to go.
Wether I made the right call or notI do wish they had something for interaction. anyways I give it a B.
Production
The biggest performer in this production was the scenery. They were all over the world in incredible locations with awesome angles. The video production crew was a world class quality.
There is a long series of interviews with about half a dozen scientists. most of which are associated with major creation science ministries.They divide the topics up into geology, Bible history, paleontology, biology, astronomy, archaeology and the big picture in the garden.
After the movie it actually extended in a post movie roundtable discussion.
positives
The movie is very efficiently produced. being on locations has a hi impact. Showing the Mt. St. Helen's sites really demonstrates the flaws of uniformitarian ism. The visuals of the canyons revealing color differences in the rock layers and realizing that these layers are connecting thousands of miles of rocklayers stack so intricately requires a global amount of water to move it.
The distance of certain (scratching lines? i forgot what they called it) across the mountains showing short measurements between each other indicating faster movements and a catastrophe.
demonstrations of the stretchy dinosaur soft tissue.
The Hebrew scholar noting the nature of the text as a narrative and not poetic literature according to the Hebrew context.
Robert Carter a marine biologist stole the show in terms of personality (Idk if it is the same guy Teno
:p )The discussion at the end of the program was really helpful talking about issues in creation science and how research is growing and the challenges regarding how much material to present and how technical to make it.
btw, the theater was almost sold out! another theater in the city was sold out.
criticism)
It is really hard to say if this was for unbelievers or believers. we have to assume it was for believers.
packing all the issues of creation science in two hours is a daunting task I explained my cosmology in 13 hrs on youtube. but two hrs is a lot of time to demand of someone. Even church kids are not necessarily science kids and we live in an ADD generation. but there was a nerdy boy at the ticket counter who was excited to go!
The format was ultimately an interview lecture. large large gaps of time with monologing answers. Very little music, no jokes, only one style of illustrating with a magic pencil upon a brown paper bag back drop. As obsessed with creation science as I am there were still extra long winks! Geology is a boring topic it should probably have been discussed later.
There is too much in house academia. Yes they typically more sophisticated, popular and have access to the best equipment, But they are often ignorant of the history of creation science and instead trained with som many naturalistic pressupositions that they accidently import unbiblical assumptions and ideas which are more in accord with evolution.
The technical language is not helpful. Nobody is being graded as to how much info they retain so if you loose the audience with technical phrases you loose your influence.
Creationist are correct in place history over science. But sometimes they do not carry this fact to it;s logical conclusion.
History is our evidential starting point! Science must submit to it and not the other way around. evidentialism does not work unless it is based in scripture. There will never be evidence that debunks scripture!
I believe the interviewer was part of the truth project under "focus on the family. He was an ID guy if I recall. Of course he may have switched to YEC , which is cool!
The guy presenting mark Armitage's research if I recall had controversy with him. I saw a youtube video wereI think Mark accused him of taking crfedit for his research. But I could have the wrong guy or they may have reconciled.
It was admitted in the post discussion that there are so many theories and they just change according to the ideas they "like more". it is annoying how a lot of good ideas have been ignored.
For instance the g;obal hurricane idea from CPT catastrophic olate tectonics where the storm makes the ice age just never made sense to me. the ice canopy theory is by far a superior explanation.
concept
Just what was the purpose of this event. I felt pretty rushed to find the time for this specific day. evangelism? Fund raising? education?
All of which have flaws. but perhaps this will prove succesful only time will tell.
feelings
all in all it is good to get the public informed about creation science.
But I do feel that as the creation science movement is growing I think the leadership is losing a lot of what has been great about the movement.
There is less scientific free thinking, more compromises with heresy, There is a concentrated effort to "tame" creation science advocates within the camp.
As the rappers say "mo' money mo' problems!"
As I exited I saw a pack of college age kids. four kids looking "churched" a shy girl with skepticisms. she was asking questions about languages and youths didn't have an answer. I really wanted to but in, but I was a stranger and then as I was about to step in any my wife came out of the bathroom and it was time to go.
Wether I made the right call or notI do wish they had something for interaction. anyways I give it a B.
No comments:
Post a Comment